Pilots at Pan Am had great career expectations too, until they started downsizing and selling off assets. Reality is you might have had those great career numbers only IF UAL had stayed in business and not shrank.

 

Sarcasm pal. Try it esp if you work for Unical...

 

Who brought more cash to this merger?

 

Well then...posting and drinking on a Friday night?

How many E190s does UAX fly?

How many 70 seat aircraft were added to replace the UAL 737s once their parking and the "virtual merger" we're announced days apart?

Answer those two questions and you'll see what really replaced the UAL aircraft. And, oh yeah, as a hint the answer to the first one is zero so your trend is not good.

 

W/regards to SLI, I think many, on both sides, just can't buy into arguments made by the other side ... that's natural. But at some point in time, the SLI will probably happen (still a chance this thing could turn into AW/US) and each and everyone of us will have to deal with that reality ... we all can pontificate on what the events of the past have rought, but nobody can tell us what the furture of L-CAL and L-UAL would have been with certainty ... so believe what you want to believe about that future, but make no mistake, you will be sleeping in the bed you made, I mean with the choice of which airline you worked for pre merger announcement.

The SLI may go to arbitration ... many a strange things have happened since the merger dancing began, and I would not rule out at least a partilly negotiated SLI ... but yes, most likely, a 3 person arbitration panel will determine our collective SL. They will consider what is the most "fair" integration, taking into account longevity, career expectations, and seat/category, with no particular weight given to any. Each side will argue so as to gain the most for thier side, as they should.

In the end, the arbitrators will probably use past precedent to guide their decision. Past precedent was guided by a "no windfall" principle in ALPA merger policy ... it's not there any more, just the word "fair" ... and the longevity consideration is also new. For these reasons, I think we will not see a "relative senority" outcome i.e. Delta/NWA ... I also can't see how a strict DOH would be deemed fair .... maybe relative seniority with a "slide" for "active" in-service time perhaps, some sort of fencing for the widebody "disparities", and we will call it even for career expectations. Or of course, they will just do what ever they want, because they can, and nobody, I mean nobody, will be happy.

Can someone in the L-UAL "DOH" camp give some data on the 1450(ish)'s DOH service time versus "active" service time??

 

It's all over the map.

The most "senior" furloughees were hired in '99 and last furloughed in '09 with a two year furlough '03-'05 so they have 8 years of active service. If longevity for pay is in the JCBA (like DAL) they will all be at 12th year.

No hiring occurred between 9/11 and '07. '07 and '08 hires have a range of nearly 2 years of active service to new hires being furloughed from training or IOE in '08. The junior ones are the lucky ones (not) that never made it past first year pay and are now starting the clock from zero a second time with the CAL job offer.

And to add to your comments, we'll know if the SLI was successful if every single pilot is equally unhappy. Except # 1 of course.

 

Everytime I hear the "alpa" policy mentioned here I just laugh. It makes it sound like cal has been alpa for 30 years when in reality the only reason they are in alpa is for a merger protection. Hey I guess it was a smart move on their part.

 

I was in the first new hire class of 2007 and I got 3 paychecks at second year pay. It was closer to 15-16 months of service.

 

Nobody at L-UAL is screaming for DOH.....however I fully expect the furloughed guys hired in 99' to NOT go behind the 2005-2007 CAL crowd....good luck thinking they will our active service is over 8 years without LONGEVITY.


I have had 2007 CAL hires think they will "beat" out all the UAL furloughed bubba's......aint gonna happen!

 

SC~
Please define "Active Service" vs "Longevity".